Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider
registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

What exactly is so impressive about audio recordings of rocks hitting sheet metal?
What is so compelling about pages upon pages of spooky wood ape encounter stories?
I will grant that the NAWAC PR man sounds smart and reasonable. I like his podcast.

But, what have they brought forward as far as evidence? Nothing. So we're in the same place with this topic that we've always been, and there's really nothing special about this group as far as I can tell other than a relatively official looking website and a couple cute but clumsy attempts at constructing what are supposed to look like scientific papers.

That said, Id still like to go to Area X and see what they've got going on.

I would suggest this is a complex mixture of gullibility and hoaxing. I've followed along, on and off, over the last few years. My concerns: 1. These events seem virtually limited to NAWAC personnel. In an area ringed with hiking trails, one that hosts deer hunters and turkey hunters, no one is fleeing the woods fearing the giant bi-pedal apes they encountered there. 2. At least two of the members have reported previous Bigfoot sightings in even more unlikely places in Oklahoma and Texas. 3. They have steadfastly refused to consider skeptical observers among their members' protracted stays, leaving all phenomena to the interpretation of "true believers." 4. They claim to be virtually surrounded by giant apes, repeatedly and over several years, yet armed with cameras, camera traps, night vision scopes, and an assortment of high powered weapons, they have been able to produce not much more than a report. 5. The little evidence they have been able to produce is unconvincing; for instance the "tracks" are poor, even by normal Bigfoot standards. 6. A curious phenomena: in the early days of Bigfootery, field researchers would be happy to find a single track, most of the time they came up with nothing. Todays field researcher often gets the full treatment of Bigfoot evidence, such as sightings, finding tracks, photos of the animals, rock throwing, recordings of tree knocks and howls and grunts, and in the most unlikely places, such as Oklahoma and Texas. But no conclusive evidence. 7. The only real tangible events occurring are the nightly rock assaults on the cabin. The more NAWAC has schemed to video capture the perps, the less the perps have rocked the cabins -- causing me to believe human agents are behind the assaults. 8. NAWAC has ignored facts that don't fit their narrative. For instance, they claimed to have found a human sized outline, in a sniper position, on the ground in the bush above the cabins on the nearby hillside. They have interpreted this as a young woodape keeping watch on the cabins at night. The more plausible scenario is that this is evidence of human surveillance of the cabin activity.

Everyone in the world goes around taking all sorts of photos on their cell phones and posting them on Facebook or Twitter or wherever. How come no photos of these whatevers or of BF show up?

Maybe the cameras refuse to work in the presence of such creatures.

Apparently we can get all sorts of amazing photos of the natural world, photos of even a weasel riding the back of a woodpecker in flight. But no good photos of massive bi-pedal apes that happen to be all around you in the coarse of several months over several years.

Given the detail and specificity of their claims, I find it hard to believe that they're being fooled by another group of people. A more plausible explanation in my opinion would be that they themselves are the ones doing the hoaxing (with BB being the mastermind). With a hoax on this scale like what was seen with the MABRC, one would find that it's hyped up and contains things that give it away. The inconsistencies that they've had so far have been the type that one would expect to find if they are telling the truth, which I find really interesting as a great deal of thinking would need to go into this for it to have that kind of detail. Pretty impressive so far.

This is the hypothesis they (NAWAC) present: Anthropoid Hypothesis: An unlisted and furtive species, probably an anthropoid, exists in the sparsely populated and rugged Ouachita Mountain Ecoregion, and is the source of longstanding as well as contemporary reports of a large, primarily bipedal, ape-like animal.

Okay, sure. Sounds good. Then comes a hypothesis must suggest consequences that are empirically testable; it should make a prediction that can be checked against reality.

Uh oh. Did someone say reality?

The reality is 200 pages that do nothing to support the original hypothesis. Lots of pictures of broken trees. An impressive mineral collection. Wood knocks. Krantz is cited often. Every textbook excuse why nawac has FAILED to find a Magical Monkey in a surprisingly small parcel of land. For 10 years now.

Fans of pseudoscience will and are eating this up right now. It's what they need to hold themselves over until the next scam comes along. Anything to keep that bigfoot hope alive in the face of all logic. And everyone's a winner and everyone gets a medal. Because Bigfoot. Bigfoot REWARDS failure.

On the plus side, it was better written than other 'scientific' bigfoot papers I've read recently.

Given the detail and specificity of their claims, I find it hard to believe that they're being fooled by another group of people. A more plausible explanation in my opinion would be that they themselves are the ones doing the hoaxing (with BB being the mastermind). With a hoax on this scale like what was seen with the MABRC, one would find that it's hyped up and contains things that give it away. The inconsistencies that they've had so far have been the type that one would expect to find if they are telling the truth, which I find really interesting as a great deal of thinking would need to go into this for it to have that kind of detail. Pretty impressive so far.

No matter how well written one might find the paper, the simple fact of the matter is this farrago hasn't netted one iota of testable evidence* in the 10+/- years this group had been wandering around this sliver of OK.

Campfire stories, ****, lots of those.

Something is amiss in the mix and I think we know what that is. Let's not forget the mighty wood-ape lumberjack incident related by one BB, the one that even some of the naifs at the BFF questioned.

* Amend that to read "not one iota of testable evidence to support the wood-ape hypothesis."

Just for fun, I looked at the different sightings in Texas, and noticed there were 3 sightings in Delta county ( the smallest county in Texas, and where my dad grew up). All three around the area of Cooper lake.

The entire area is 90% farmland, with just a few small areas of forest. I've been there many times. It's laughable to think BF is in this area. If you zoom in a little, you can clearly see the terrain, and all of the buildings in the area....generally no more than 1000-2000 ft from each other.

Just for fun, I looked at the different sightings in Texas, and noticed there were 3 sightings in Delta county ( the smallest county in Texas, and where my dad grew up). All three around the area of Cooper lake.

The entire area is 90% farmland, with just a few small areas of forest. I've been there many times. It's laughable to think BF is in this area. If you zoom in a little, you can clearly see the terrain, and all of the buildings in the area....generally no more than 1000-2000 ft from each other.

Having spent some time in the area that I suspect NAWACKY Valley is locate.
This area is a very high use NF the roads that Brain Brown describes as difficult Jeep trails, yeah right 90% of what I saw could be driven in a car or 2WD truck.
The fire roads/trails are peppered with impromptu campsites, cabins, trailers ect again this area is very easy to access and obviously used often by the locals.
Traps? any thoughts
Always remember one thing about Brian Brown he's a communications director/promoter/spin doctor whatever you'd like to call it. His job is to keep this project out front. He's also one of or is the original founder of BFF.
I've always had the sense that he wishes he was in Matt Moneymakers shoes. He loves the spotlight as long as he controls the conversation and it doesn't get to warm......his take my toys and leave exit at BFF was a great example.
Great place to visit easy/drivable access to some remote country for sure... Valley of the Bigfeets...not so much....Valley of the NAWACKYS sure thing!

This area is a very high use NF the roads that Brain Brown describes as difficult Jeep trails, yeah right 90% of what I saw could be drive in a car or 2WD truck.

Concur. Having conducted my PhD research in the Appalachians, I was very impressed by the quality of the roads in the Ouachitas when I made it out there several years ago. (I had a student do a two-year study of breeding birds there, and he specifically targeted the highest peaks and deepest valleys 'cause he was looking for species at the edge of their ranges.) The paved roads can be very heavily trafficked by logging trucks and weekend campers, but the gravel roads have to be maintained well enough to handle that truck traffic too and, by and large, they are.

I gotta say Shrike if I had it to do all over again I'd follow in your footsteps, that stuff sounds like a blast to me.

The problem is that if you're any good at it you cease to be the guy who goes outside and you morph into the guy who writes grants to get money to hire other people to go outside. That part's not so much a blast.

“We have a very compelling piece of evidence in a dread of hair found by a hunter in East Texas that has come back [from the lab] as ‘nonhuman primate.’ We are also testing some evidence that could be a game-changer,” he says.

Well, the game hasn't changed all that much since 2011. Same assertions, no corroborating evidence.

BTW, what does "came back from the lab" mean? I'm assuming morphology rather than DNA testing.

The problem is that if you're any good at it you cease to be the guy who goes outside and you morph into the guy who writes grants to get money to hire other people to go outside. That part's not so much a blast.

Can I ask what you think of this monograph? Anything compelling to you that might explain Ms. Hill's . . . enthusiasm.

The Authors must have turned down my submission for a two-part sketch series, depicting the Near Miss of the Solar Panel.

__________________"I dont call that evolution, I call that the survival of the fittest." - Bulletmaker
"I thought skeptics would usually point towards a hoax rather than a group being duped." - makaya325
Kit is not a skeptic. He is a former Bigfoot believer that changed his position to that of non believer.- Crowlogic

The reasonable answer is that some or all of the members are in on the hoax. This is high level BLAARGing...not yet Finding Bigfoot level, but that may be an end goal.

I wonder if leaving the BFF and publishing this paper means the end of the "Project" is near? Maybe they didn't get a new lease on the 10 acre wilderness this year.

As I understand it this property is a site bordering the NF and used for rentals of multiple cabins during hunting season. Rent your cabin hike onto NF lands bag your deer.
Yet close enough to a public road with a site seeing turn off...that when the NAWACKY's start blasting away the couple hanging out think their being fired at.
So all during hunting season..no bigfoot but as soon as the NAWACKY's show up next month or so BAM Bigfoot grand central....sure!

The NAWAC is no different than any habituator. If the contacts are as frequent as claimed, there would be ample opportunities to collect biological evidence. And to obtain that evidence with some of the new extraction techniques.

We wouldn't be having this conversation if they're legit. It would be a different one entirely.

Can I ask what you think of this monograph? Anything compelling to you that might explain Ms. Hill's . . . enthusiasm.

It's a bloviating mess of over 200 pages of BLAARGarbage. I can't see what anyone would find compelling in that document or in the project. I'm at a complete loss to explain Sharon's warm fuzzies about it, and I went to her site and posted so.

It's the same crap over and over and over. Do we need a new metaphor? This is drowning a bowl of spaghetti beneath a bathtub of tomato juice rather than dressing it with 2 tablespoons of flavorful, basil-infused marinara.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.